Hallmarking System (Hansard, 3 March 1994)

§ Viscount Goschen
My Lords, negotiations are continuing on the European Commission's proposal for a draft directive. The Government are determined to preserve as much of the British hallmarking system as possible and to ensure that consumers are afforded the high level of protection to which they are presently accustomed.

§ Baroness Gardner of Parkes
My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that Answer. Is the Minister aware that under Article 12 of the draft directive, manufacturers will be allowed, to strike existing traditional marks"? Can he assure us that the famous British hallmarks which have guaranteed absolute standards since 1300 will continue to be able to be used correctly in this country and not misused by other European countries?

§ Viscount Goschen
My Lords, the proposed directive as it stands would generally permit only two marks: the sponsor's mark denoting both the manufacturer and the notified body; and a fineness mark. Therefore, British assay officers would not be able to use their existing hallmarks. However, the draft directive would allow the continued use of so-called traditional marks so long as they do not confuse. We are seeking clarification from the Commission, and we shall continue to argue for existing hallmarks to be included.

§ Lord Bridges
My Lords, does the Minister agree that negotiations on the draft directive have now entered a critical phase? If so, will he please arrange for their conduct to be carefully supervised in his department, bearing in mind that the present text of the so-called Annexe 4 does not safeguard adequately the interests of consumers and would also undermine seriously the hallmarking arrangements which have existed satisfactorily in this country for seven centuries?

§ Viscount Goschen
My Lords, the Government have strong reservations about the conformity procedure proposed in Annexe 4 of the draft directive— the manufacturer's declaration of conformity that he has properly struck the sponsor's and the fineness marks on 1126 the article. We believe that Annexe 4 is a weak form of control which is open to abuse. We shall argue for changes in the draft proposals.

§ Lord Dean of Beswick
My Lords, is the noble Viscount aware that the noble Lord, Lord Bridges, has correctly stated the case? Any reduction in the standards relating to traditional hallmarks in this country may well open the door to sharp practice, which we can do without. It may also lead to a reduction in consumer protection. Along with other noble Lords, I hope that the Government will resist any diminution of those standards.

§ Viscount Goschen
My Lords, I assure the noble Lord, Lord Dean of Beswick, that the Government recognise fully the strength of the British hallmarking system; and they support it. We should not wish to see lower standards of consumer protection 'which must remain the priority in any such arrangements.

§ Lord Marlesford
My Lords, does my noble friend agree that if subsidiarity means anything at all, it should cover this subject? This kind of nonsense risks alienating those of us who remain committed to the European ideal.

§ Viscount Goschen
My Lords, as regards subsidiarity, the Government's position must be to satisfy the subsidiarity provisions by achieving a system which satisfies UK objectives without an unnecessary proliferation of new rules or unnecessary costs for business while maintaining the extremely high UK standards in that area.

Lord Bruce of Donington
My Lords, in his original reply the noble Viscount said that the Government would endeavour to maintain the British position sc far as possible. Is he aware that that is not at all adequate? Who in the Commission dreamt up this idea out of the blue? Why do they not mind their own business and get on with something that is really important for the people of Europe?

§ Viscount Goschen
My Lords, I have stressed that the Government sympathise with the anxieties expressed while recognising the desire for harmonisation; and that is shared by industry. That is why we are continuing to press for the maintenance of the highest standards.

§ Lord Pearson of Rannoch
My Lords, I wonder whether my noble friend could inform the House under what article of the Treaty of Rome this absurd directive is proposed; and whether we are in a position to be outvoted on it, whether we like it or not.

§ Viscount Goschen
My Lords, the directive has been proposed as a single market measure under Article 100A of the treaty establishing the European Economic Community.

The Viscount of Oxfuird
My Lords, is my noble friend aware that the deputy warden of the London Assay Office has achieved considerable progress in the preparation of a draft European standard? Can he assure 1127 the House that the interests not only of the consumer but also of those involved in the precious metals and related industries will be looked after?

§ Viscount Goschen
My Lords, the industry recognises the need for some form of harmonisation; but all sections of the industry— manufacturers, assay officers and retailers— support the existing arrangements which are easily comprehensible and which offer a very high level of protection to the consumer.

§ Lord Peston
My Lords, I am stupefied by the suggestion of a desire for some form of harmonisation. Does the Minister not recognise that we have an extremely satisfactory system of hallmarking in this country which protects the consumer? Perhaps the noble Viscount will address himself to the remarks made by the noble Lord, Lord Marlesford. I speak, as the Minister knows, as a strong supporter of the Community, but I should like to know on what grounds the Community is involving itself in a state of affairs which is currently more than satisfactory. The present system offers an extremely good measure of consumer protection. The Government should not be negotiating on this issue. They should be saying no.

§ Viscount Goschen
My Lords, I endorse entirely the views of the noble Lord, Lord Peston, on the strength of the existing UK system. But at present, a number of differing systems are in use throughout the European Union for marking precious metals. Member states, as well as the Commission, see the benefits of harmonisation. We shall continue to press for the maintenance of the present extremely high standards.

§ Lord Pearson of Rannoch
My Lords, with the leave of the House, I wonder whether I could press my noble friend to answer the second half of my question as to whether this country can be outvoted on this absurd directive, whether we like it or not.

§ Viscount Goschen
My Lords, my understanding is that the directive is governed by the principle of qualified majority voting.

§ Baroness Gardner of Parkes
My Lords, is it not a fact that five other European countries each have their own satisfactory hallmarking standards? Can we not call upon them as allies to support the idea of retaining our own individual hallmarking standards?

§ Viscount Goschen
My Lords, the Government are aware that a number of other member states including France, Ireland, the Netherlands, Portugal and Spain also have reservations about the Annexe 4 procedure. They also seek to maintain the high standards which they have in their industries.